New vaccine

[Eddie99]

 ... and some *Covid-related but not directly Covid*, like delayed planned diagnostics and surgeries, people with emergency needs simply not attending A&E, staff shortfall, staff errors due to exhaustion, etc

[Dermotsgirl]

3 minutes ago, Eddie99 said:

 ... and some *Covid-related but not directly Covid*, like delayed planned diagnostics and surgeries, people with emergency needs simply not attending A&E, staff shortfall, staff errors due to exhaustion, etc

Yes, there's all sorts of implications 

[Eddie99]

Positive thought for today

 

It’s 4.30 and I haven’t yet put the lights on! Yay!

(sorry for people with bad weather)

 

Edit - and I’m so happy about it I’ve posted in the wrong thread.  D’oh

Edited January 14, 2021 by Eddie99

[grapau27]

3 hours ago, jeanlyon said:

I wonder if more people getting the flu vaccine this year means there were less deaths from that?

Hi Jean.

I have had to sign back in to cc 3 times today on my Android phone (Google Chrome)

Graham.

[zap99]

3 hours ago, yorkshirephil said:

And that is exactly why I now sleep on the floor as 80% of men die in bed.

It would certainly be advisable to avoid that bed.

[Selbourne]

6 hours ago, Splice the mainbrace said:

 

My wife and I also had the flu letters this week.

We had the flu jab in September at Boots, they can't have fed back to our Doctors to update their records. I wonder how many times this has happened overall in the country and how much it has cost the NHS to chase up people who have already had it at Pharmacies. I hope that they have better systems in place for Covid jab record feedback!

My wife and I had our flu jabs months ago at a pharmacy. I phoned our GP surgery to tell them that we had both had the jab, so that they could knock us off their list of people that they needed to offer it to. They thanked me for doing so. Several months later they phoned me to invite me for a flu jab 🙄

[Snow Hill]

9 hours ago, jeanlyon said:

I wonder if more people getting the flu vaccine this year means there were less deaths from that?

Also the social distancing, Isolating, masks etc would also reduce flu infections

[Selbourne]

6 hours ago, Dermotsgirl said:

Exactly, the excess deaths alone for 2020 show that there have been many more deaths than normal, and it would be astonishing if the vast majority of these excess deaths were not caused by by people catching Covid, what with a pandemic going on! 

I don’t think that’s the case. As you say, figures this week were released showing that there had been 100,000 excess deaths. Over 80,000 deaths have been attributed to Covid even though, as previously stated by several others, this is an inflated figure as a proportion of these deaths won’t have been caused by Covid. The elephant in the room, which explains the additional excess deaths (over and above those directly attributed to covid), is the number of deaths caused by the near shut down of the NHS as a result of the pandemic, but completely unrelated to covid. In other words, these people didn’t have covid, but didn’t have treatment or investigations for other conditions, notably cancer, strokes and heart conditions.
 

Cancer experts such as Professor Karol Sikora warned at the start of the pandemic that this would happen. Admissions for strokes and heart attacks were, at one stage, more than one third below normal levels, yet there would have been just as many happening. People were ignoring red flag symptoms for fear of being admitted to hospital. Sadly, due to the fact that cancer survival rates are primarily determined by early diagnosis, the worst of this problem is yet to come. Thousands of people will be walking time bombs and deaths from cancer over the next few years will undoubtably be higher than usual. So, nothing to do with covid directly, but caused as a direct result of the pandemic. 

Edited January 14, 2021 by Selbourne

[Dermotsgirl]

21 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

I don’t think that’s the case. As you say, figures this week were released showing that there had been 100,000 excess deaths. Over 80,000 deaths have been attributed to Covid even though, as previously stated by several others, this is an inflated figure as a proportion of these deaths won’t have been caused by Covid. The elephant in the room, which explains the additional excess deaths (over and above those directly attributed to covid), is the number of deaths caused by the near shut down of the NHS as a result of the pandemic, but completely unrelated to covid. In other words, these people didn’t have covid, but didn’t have treatment or investigations for other conditions, notably cancer, strokes and heart conditions.
 

Cancer experts such as Professor Karol Sikora warned at the start of the pandemic that this would happen. Admissions for strokes and heart attacks were, at one stage, more than one third below normal levels, yet there would have been just as many happening. People were ignoring red flag symptoms for fear of being admitted to hospital. Sadly, due to the fact that cancer survival rates are primarily determined by early diagnosis, the worst of this problem is yet to come. Thousands of people will be walking time bombs and deaths from cancer over the next few years will undoubtably be higher than usual. So, nothing to do with covid directly, but caused as a direct result of the pandemic. 

I don’t doubt for a minute that some of the excess deaths in 2020 were due to people not getting treatment for other illnesses. But I still attribute most of the excess deaths to Covid, as the excess deaths rise and fall in line with the waves of the pandemic. 
 

I do agree that over the next few years there will be a residual effect of  more deaths from other causes, due to delayed treatment.

 

notwithstanding the reasons for all the additional deaths - it’s been a terrible loss of life 

[mrbluesea]

27 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

many more deaths than normal, and it would be astonishing if the vast majority of these excess deaths were not caused by by people catching Covid

I think this is a reasonable assumption, with the use of the term 'vast'.

[Selbourne]

4 minutes ago, mrbluesea said:

I think this is a reasonable assumption, with the use of the term 'vast'.

For the avoidance of doubt, your post attributes that quote to me, but it was said by Dermotsgirl. 

[batholiver]

On 1/11/2021 at 4:04 PM, Eddie99 said:

We all seem to be finding the prospect of 80+ descending in hoardes on stadium-type hubs a little odd.  Great for bulk vaccinations for the working age population

 

Talking of whom, here’s a grab from the Sky website on proceedings in the HoC this afternoon.  Sounds very good, if it all goes according to plan

 

By the end of April everyone in the top nine priority groups will have been offered the vaccine, Sir Simon Stevens has told MPs on the Public Accounts Committee.

The government has so far only committed to vaccinating 13 million people over 70, plus frontline health and social care workers, by mid-February, with other vulnerable people following in the spring.

But Sir Simon made clear that there would be a second "sprint" to the end of April to immunise the other 17 million in priority groups.

It's important to roll the vaccine out to those in their 50s and 60s as swiftly as possible.

The median age of people admitted to ICU in December was 62 - and the pressure on critical care won't ease until the middle aged are protected.

I think it was Dermotsgirl who pointed out the use of the word 'offered' in the government's statement on this.

 

Which means, on the strength of what happened when thousands of testing kits were put in the post to people the day before the testing target was about to be failed, that we could in one month's time be facing the same situation, because at the current rate of vaccination there's no way this mid-February target can be met.

 

It'll be interesting to see whether on 14 February tens of thousands of vaccination 'offers' go out in the post for dates in March, April, May etc.

 

Just a thought posed by Tim Harford on Radio 4's More or Less this week - as he says, they have form on this!

[davecttr]

As far as I am concerned any 'excess death' caused by lack of medical care due to COVID is a death caused by COVID.

 

The gutter press sink to a new low this morning, trumpeting that the R number is as low as 0.6 but what they don't write on the front page is the figures are not from the government who have the rate as 1.0 to 1.4 as of yesterday. Do the idiots realise that this could kill people as they relax their guard cos the paper says it is alright. I believe this may happen in Kent as well as people misinterpret the falling local infection rates shown on the TV as a green light. 😠

[Adawn47]

17 hours ago, Dermotsgirl said:

What I don't get is why Covid is the only illness that people what to know if people died 'of; or 'with'

At the moment the death rates are alarming, but at this time of year there is a large rise in them normally. I know that this virus is deadly, but I think it's important to know how many deaths can be directly contributed to covid. If they count every covid death both 'of or with,' then how do they know the true severity of the virus? I don't think it's just enough to know how virulent it is we need to know how deadly, and only by knowing the deaths caused directly by the virus can they do that.

Avril

Edited January 15, 2021 by Adawn47

[brian1]

10 hours ago, Selbourne said:

My wife and I had our flu jabs months ago at a pharmacy. I phoned our GP surgery to tell them that we had both had the jab, so that they could knock us off their list of people that they needed to offer it to. They thanked me for doing so. Several months later they phoned me to invite me for a flu jab 🙄

When we had ours at the little Boots round the corner,the guy punched us into the computer.I assumed that was the NHS database.

[lincslady]

Still no vaccination centre round Newark - it is supposed to be opening 'this week', but there is not much week left.  The site is a large one, Newark Showground, where they have the antiques fairs, and will not be easy to get to or around for not so fit 80+  year olds.

 

Plan is still to respond to the invite, when we get it, by phoning our nice GP's receptionists to say we can't manage there, and presume they will be doing them in their accessible and suitable surgery environment - eventually.

[Selbourne]

1 hour ago, batholiver said:

I think it was Dermotsgirl who pointed out the use of the word 'offered' in the government's statement on this.

 

Which means, on the strength of what happened when thousands of testing kits were put in the post to people the day before the testing target was about to be failed, that we could in one month's time be facing the same situation, because at the current rate of vaccination there's no way this mid-February target can be met.

 

It'll be interesting to see whether on 14 February tens of thousands of vaccination 'offers' go out in the post for dates in March, April, May etc.

 

Just a thought posed by Tim Harford on Radio 4's More or Less this week - as he says, they have form on this!

I agree that based on the current rate of vaccination, the target of getting all over 70’s and care home workers / residents plus front line NHS staff all jabbed by 15th Feb is looking nigh on impossible. I’m not saying that they won’t do it, but the vaccination rate this week hasn’t increased by anywhere near as much as I was hoping it would and therefore they will now need to be jabbing well over 2.5m people a week, every week, for the next 4 weeks to achieve it.
 

I also noticed the change of terminology from ‘vaccinated by 15th Feb’ to ‘offered a vaccination by 15th Feb’ and took that as an admission that they weren’t going to achieve it. However, I have since seen both the PM (at the Commons Select Committee on Wednesday) and the Health Secretary (in an interview) say, when pressed about the word ‘offered’ that this does in fact mean ‘jabbed’ by 15th Feb, the term ‘offered”being because it isn’t compulsory to have it. I sincerely hope that they will succeed, not just for the sake of the people in those groups, but because it will mean that everyone else gets their jab sooner. Time will tell. 

[Splice the mainbrace]

288,000 jabs given on 13th Jan according to Gov figures, thats 2,016,00 a week.

[Aulanis]

1 hour ago, brian1 said:

When we had ours at the little Boots round the corner,the guy punched us into the computer.I assumed that was the NHS database.

 A claim for remuneration? 

[Son of Anarchy]

1 hour ago, brian1 said:

When we had ours at the little Boots round the corner,the guy punched us into the computer.I assumed that was the NHS database.

Could be worse, he could have punched you in the googlies...

[Dinglebert]

2 hours ago, brian1 said:

When we had ours at the little Boots round the corner,the guy punched us into the computer.I assumed that was the NHS database.

Its a system for pharmacies to get paid

 

https://psnc.org.uk/services-commissioning/advanced-services/flu-vaccination-service/flu-vaccination-record-keeping-and-data-requirements/

[bobstheboy]

The current vaccination rate will increase dramatically once the Oxford vaccine is widely distributed. Some our GPs are at a local Hub giving the jab but have stated that once they get supplies of the Oxford vaccine, they will start at our surgery and can vaccinate a thousand a day.

 

Every confidence the target will be hit and surpassed

Edited January 15, 2021 by bobstheboy
Typo

[zap99]

2 hours ago, Splice the mainbrace said:

288,000 jabs given on 13th Jan according to Gov figures, thats 2,016,00 a week.

How dare you post facts that show things are looking good.🤣

[Eddie99]

Bumped into an elderly neighbour on the way out to our walk this morning (Elderly = 15 years older than me; just like middle-aged always used to be 15 years older than me.  I don’t think I can get away with that now 🙂). Anyway - she’s got her jab appointment for Tuesday.

If only I was a bit older ..... not really! 😉

[cruisenewbie1976]

2 hours ago, Selbourne said:

I agree that based on the current rate of vaccination, the target of getting all over 70’s and care home workers / residents plus front line NHS staff all jabbed by 15th Feb is looking nigh on impossible. I’m not saying that they won’t do it, but the vaccination rate this week hasn’t increased by anywhere near as much as I was hoping it would and therefore they will now need to be jabbing well over 2.5m people a week, every week, for the next 4 weeks to achieve it.
 

I also noticed the change of terminology from ‘vaccinated by 15th Feb’ to ‘offered a vaccination by 15th Feb’ and took that as an admission that they weren’t going to achieve it. However, I have since seen both the PM (at the Commons Select Committee on Wednesday) and the Health Secretary (in an interview) say, when pressed about the word ‘offered’ that this does in fact mean ‘jabbed’ by 15th Feb, the term ‘offered”being because it isn’t compulsory to have it. I sincerely hope that they will succeed, not just for the sake of the people in those groups, but because it will mean that everyone else gets their jab sooner. Time will tell. 

If the various headlines are to be believed, they'll be doing 500k per day from next week.